Could you also file a webkit-dev signals request, and a "FYI" TAG issue?

On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 12:16 PM Chris Harrelson <[email protected]>
wrote:

> LGTM3
>
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 1:15 PM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> LGTM2
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 8:18 PM Mason Freed <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the comments!
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 1:17 AM Yoav Weiss <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Mason and Tooru!
>>>>
>>>> This does indeed sound like an improvement towards interop on the popup
>>>> front.
>>>> Does this change the current Chromium behavior by default? (i.e. when a
>>>> "popup" argument is not passed)
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, this should not change the "opening" behavior of Chromium. We
>>> originally planned to slightly change the "triggers" for a popup, but a use
>>> counter study (results discussed around here
>>> <https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/5872#issuecomment-883729502>)
>>> showed too high a percentage of potentially changed behavior. So we fell
>>> back to the current proposal which does not change behavior (assuming
>>> "popup" isn't passed). This proposal will change the return values from the
>>> BarProp properties, but these should have lower compat risk, we think.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, that makes sense!
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 5:22 PM Rick Byers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm thrilled to see window.open behavior getting more predictable and
>>>>> understandable. Thank you Tooru and Mason! The precise details of
>>>>> window.open behavior has long been an ugly wart on the web platform IMHO.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree that the risk seems likely to be small, LGTM1.
>>>>>
>>>>> But as always, please keep an eye out for feedback during
>>>>> canary/dev/beta and be prepared to pause the roll-out of this feature if 
>>>>> we
>>>>> see non-trivial evidence of compat impact. window.open seems like exactly
>>>>> the sort of feature that sites have taken hard dependencies on the precise
>>>>> behavior of in different browsers for many years. These are the sort of
>>>>> features which often surprise us with compat impact due to very subtle
>>>>> changes, but we can't let that stop us from trying to improve them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> Thanks! I definitely agree that this is an area that can cause
>>> compat trouble. We'll definitely monitor for feedback, and there is a
>>> blink::Feature (kWindowOpenNewPopupBehavior) that can be used as a
>>> killswitch if necessary.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mason
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>    Rick
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 12:16 PM Mason Freed <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Tooru for the explanation. (Tooru made/landed the spec changes
>>>>>> for this feature.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've also updated the chromestatus entry
>>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/feature/5663031909416960> with a bit more
>>>>>> detail, and I copied the new text below. Hopefully between the two of
>>>>>> these, your questions have been answered. But let me know if not!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Motivation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The window.open() API is currently confusing to use, in terms of
>>>>>> trying to get it to open a popup vs. a tab/window. This change simplifies
>>>>>> the usage by adding a single boolean argument called 'popup' that works 
>>>>>> as
>>>>>> you'd expect: popup=1 gets you a popup, and popup=0 gets a tab/window:
>>>>>> const popup = window.open('_blank','','popup=1'); const tab =
>>>>>> window.open('_blank','','popup=0'); Also there were previously
>>>>>> confusingly-behaved getters for the BarProp visible properties (e.g.
>>>>>> window.statusbar.visible) which didn't correctly represent what was
>>>>>> actually visible. Now, those all return true if you got a new window/tab,
>>>>>> and false if you got a popup. This is an interop-driven change, to align
>>>>>> Chromium with the newly-landed spec for window.open. It does not change
>>>>>> existing behavior around whether a popup or tab/window is opened, to 
>>>>>> avoid
>>>>>> compat issues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 12:10 PM Tooru Fujisawa <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > Could you maybe write a few lines that explain what this does and
>>>>>>> how developers are expected to use it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The change standardize the following 2 things:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    - the condition to open minimal popup
>>>>>>>    - whether to open popup or not isn't normative. browsers can:
>>>>>>>          - provide options to override the behavior
>>>>>>>          - simply ignore, for example, in case it lacks the concept
>>>>>>>          of window, like mobile browsers
>>>>>>>       - BarProp.visible value
>>>>>>>       - this is normative change, for improving privacy
>>>>>>>       - It stops reflecting actual UI visibility or features
>>>>>>>       parameter of window.open
>>>>>>>       - if the window/tab is opened by requesting a popup by
>>>>>>>       window.open, all BarProp.visible returns false. otherwise true
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the developer impact would be:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    - popup condition
>>>>>>>       - in general
>>>>>>>          - the old UI-related features (locationbar, toolbar,
>>>>>>>          menubar, resizable, scrollbars, status) are now mildly
>>>>>>>          deprecated
>>>>>>>          - if they want positioned/sized a popup, just specifying
>>>>>>>          left/top and/or width/height works
>>>>>>>          - if they don't want a popup, they shouldn't specify any
>>>>>>>          features except noopener or noreferer
>>>>>>>       - on Chromium
>>>>>>>          - the basic condition isn't changed. no impact
>>>>>>>       - on Firefox
>>>>>>>          - width feature is removed from the condition for opening
>>>>>>>          popup window, but having non-empty feature requests popup, so 
>>>>>>> not much
>>>>>>>          impact unless the feature has
>>>>>>>          location,menubar,scrollbars,status that requests non-popup
>>>>>>>       - on Safari
>>>>>>>          - Safari uses different behavior, it uses minimal popup,
>>>>>>>          normal window, and normal tab, and the condition is different, 
>>>>>>> so there can
>>>>>>>          be some impact that different thing (window/popup/tab) is 
>>>>>>> opened
>>>>>>>       - new "popup" feature
>>>>>>>       - in general
>>>>>>>          - if website hits a compatibility issue about whether to
>>>>>>>          open popup or not, they can use the newly added "popup"
>>>>>>>          feature for the quick fix
>>>>>>>             - popup=1 if they want a popup
>>>>>>>             - popup=0 if they don't want a popup
>>>>>>>          - for basic usage, this feature isn't much necessary,
>>>>>>>          given:
>>>>>>>             - to request popup, having non-empty features (except
>>>>>>>             noopener or noreferer) works, and in most case the
>>>>>>>             popup will have width (if the website wants to request
>>>>>>>             popup without specifying position/size, they can use "
>>>>>>>             popup" feature)
>>>>>>>          - to request non-popup, just having empty features (except
>>>>>>>             noopener or noreferer) works
>>>>>>>          - BarProp.visible:
>>>>>>>       - in general
>>>>>>>          - there was already inconsistency between browsers, so I'd
>>>>>>>          expect not much meaningful usage for it, except for finger 
>>>>>>> printing
>>>>>>>          - there's no alternative for getting actual UI visibility
>>>>>>>       - on Chromium
>>>>>>>          - this was returning each features in window.open call
>>>>>>>       - on Firefox and Safari
>>>>>>>          - this is/was mostly returning the actual visibility
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > Have they implemented? Have they shipped?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Firefox implemented and shipped the change in version 96, that will
>>>>>>> be released on 2022-01-11:
>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1701001
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The option to override the behavior is in WIP:
>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1714939
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM%3DNeDh8Oi%2Bi37s0WVUFzYPMxGTx-TOwBaETdk6WgT5P_8FPuw%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM%3DNeDh8Oi%2Bi37s0WVUFzYPMxGTx-TOwBaETdk6WgT5P_8FPuw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "blink-dev" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfUJ%2Bpc3iM7N-f_v6HkGaFRFQbWnbhp_2jTEEH%3DJ91WqOQ%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAL5BFfUJ%2Bpc3iM7N-f_v6HkGaFRFQbWnbhp_2jTEEH%3DJ91WqOQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOMQ%2Bw_0mnJnJi_Rzo5gJxOfrfFU2rAyPdyEBBNQ9NEqzY6MxQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to